The Duran Podcast - West pushes Ukraine towards military defeat w/ Brian Berletic (Live)

Episode Date: October 22, 2024

West pushes Ukraine towards military defeat w/ Brian Berletic (Live)

Okay, we are live with Alexander Mercutis, and with us today, we are very happy to have on the Duran. Once again, Brian, Verletic, Brian, how are you doing today? I'm doing very well. Thank you so much for having me back on. I'm sporting a Duran shirt here, so I'm a little dressed down, but for a reason. And I very much look forward to our discussion today. The shirt looks great, Brian. It's a great shirt.

the Duran shop, definitely check out the merch that we have. October 20, 20% off all our merchandise on the shop this October. A quick hello to everybody that is watching us on Rockfin, Odyssey, Rumble, YouTube, and the Duran.orgals.com. A big shout out to our moderators as well. Thank you to all our moderators and everything that you do to keep the chat. Civilized. Keep the chat running and civilized. Hey, Peter, how are you doing today in the chat? And Brian, I'm pretty sure that most people are following you that are watching this live stream today.

But for those who are not familiar with your work or with your channel, where is the best place for them to find you? The easiest way is to just type in the new Atlas into YouTube. And then in the video description of every video is everywhere else you can find. and follow my work, including on Rumble and Telegram in case my YouTube channel disappears, or in case you don't feel like watching it on YouTube Rumble and Telegram are alternatives. I'm also on X, and all of that information will be in the video description of each video. Yeah, I'm following you on X. You're putting out great posts.

And I have the YouTube link to the New Atlas. I also have the Telegram and the Rumble link in the description box down below, and I will add those links as a pinned comment when the live stream is over. So Alexander, Brian, let's talk about what is happening with Project Ukraine. They are being pushed to continue to fight when they should be pushed by the West to negotiate. But that's the situation. Alexander, Brian. Absolutely. Now, before I start on that, can I just say anybody who isn't who's watching us who isn't following Brian, I think they should follow Brian.

I myself find his programs absolutely indispensable in understanding what is going on. I think they're amongst the best programs in understanding the war and what is going on that are out there. So just to say. So we are in a situation, it seems to me, that Brian and others, ourselves, predicted long ago, even the Western powers are now starting to admit that the war in Ukraine is being lost. The economist, which is absolute, you know, ground zero in terms of neocon thinking, actually said that. A couple of weeks ago, it said Ukraine is losing the war. and it discussed how if things continue the way they are.

It won't just be a losing war. It will be a lost war. And you see this in more and more places now. And we've had lots of buzz over the last couple of weeks. There's an article by Thomas Graham of the Council for Foreign Relations today, in national interest, who's again coming up with the free. idea, the freeze of the conflict idea, a conflict freeze idea, which, to be clear, the Russians have categorically rejected and which Zelensky has also categorically rejected. But these

are isolated voices. What is remarkable is that even though everybody in the West can see that the war is being lost, on the contrary, far from trying to find a solution, a diplomatic solution, right, instead of finding a looking for a way out, instead of suggesting to the Ukrainians, seriously, look, this is the point where you have to start talking to the Russians or doing what Thomas Graham says, talking to the Russians themselves. He advocates that the United States enter into negotiations with the Russians. Far from it, they're doing the exact opposite. They're urging Ukraine to go on fighting. They want Ukraine to mobilize all of its men down to the age of 18.

They still refuse outright. Any discussions with the Russians. The Russians, by the way, sent out a feeler to the American embassy in Moscow. Are you interested in talking? The answer came back emphatic. No. So we are propelling Ukraine forward in a. lost war. And the Ukrainians, for their part, are coming up with victory plans, which if they were

ever implemented, would lurch us straight into World War III. Well, Brian, what are your thoughts about this? I mean, I confess, for me, this is irrational to the extreme that we continue to insist on fighting a war that we know we are losing and are going to lose. But that seems to be what everybody of importance across the West is determined to do. This is the nature of proxy war. They're using Ukraine and they're making good on their promise to fight to the last Ukrainian. And I know that I have brought this up a million times, but the Rand Corporation, 2019 paper titled Extending Russia, under the measure for providing lethal aid to Ukraine, under risks, they talk about how it could come at a significant cost to Ukraine and to U.S.

and credibility. It can produce disproportionately large Ukrainian casualties, territorial losses, refugee flows. it could even force Ukraine into a disaventatious peace, which is exactly where we're at right now. People want to know where we are in the Ukraine conflict, this proxy war. That is exactly where we are. And the Theran Corporation document was just one of many simply articulating U.S. foreign policy using Ukraine as a proxy against Russia in the same way the U.S. uses proxies in the Middle East against Iran and also many proxies against China and the Asia-Pacific region.

It's the same game plan, playbook, and it's using it for each and every one of these regions. The world is trying to dominate and reassert primacy over. So that's where we are. We're at that point where it's a proxy war. It's not America losing soldiers. It's not their infrastructure being leveled to the ground. Many people in Washington even said, we will keep doing this until the very last Ukrainian. So unfortunately, it's irrational if you considered Ukraine and allies.

but the U.S. doesn't consider them an ally. They are an expendable proxy. I'm afraid I completely agree with you. I mean, in fact, the idea of calling up Ukrainian men up to the age of 18, down to the age of 18, and getting them to fight. What else is that? But basically demanding that this proxy go on fighting and sacrifice all its use in this losing war because I think we're all agreed if the Ukrainians call up all their young men down to the age of 18 it's not going to change the outcome of the war all it's going to result is many many more tens hundreds of thousands of young Ukrainians being killed and many others who survived those who survived being traumatized for the rest of their lives

but this is what I don't understand I completely agree I accept that is that was the original plan. I mean, they've said as much. Austin said that this is all about weakening Russia, doing all of those sort of things, pursuing a quest for primacy. But it seems to me

that the effect, at least with respect to Russia, is the exact opposite. Now, General Cavalry has just said at the end of this war, we're going to be faced with a stronger Russian army than the one we confronted previously. There's been a long article by Simplicius the thinker, drawing on the Keel report.

Keel report has gone into huge detail about who is winning the armaments race. No contest here. The Russians are winning the armaments race. As we are making this program, world leaders, non-Western world leaders are meeting in Kazan. They're talking about setting up international payment and currency systems. The British media is so upset by the fact that this is a meeting of the BRIC states happening in Russia that they won't even acknowledge the fact that it is in fact a meeting of the BRIC states. They're calling it a Russian conference or Russian-backed conference. They want to avoid using the word BRICs.

I mean, it is absolutely bizarre. I've discussed this in my very latest program, the one that's coming out this evening. So, I mean, I accept that was the plan, but the plan is failing. And yet you can't change the plan, apparently. You are so hardwired to continue that even as it all goes wrong, you must continue to ask that Ukraine make more and more blunt sacrifice. give up more and more of its territory, lose more and more of its territory, face complete physical bankruptcy in order to achieve a Western plan which is actually not working.

Absolutely. So what is actually irrational is the overarching plan for the U.S. and the collective West to maintain privacy over the globe. And if you look at history and I know, Alexander, you especially know a tremendous amount about history. The collective West, for generation centuries, they have pursued empire across the globe. And this is just something that is hardwired in the education system, institutions, political institutions, the culture, the mindset is utterly obsessed with the idea of Western supremacy and its pursuit and its imposition on the rest of the world. But I would say after World War II, if you look at the trajectory of the collective West's power,

has been in terminal decline. It has just continuously declined. The collective West was being ejected out of Southeast Asia. The U.S. intervened in the Vietnam War. They lost there. And it really has been just a series of losing battles all around the world where the West is attempting to reassert itself. Africa now is a very good example of where the West is being uprooted and expelled. or displaced.

And now we see the same thing happening in the Middle East, to a greater degree, this standoff in Asia Pacific, but also U.S. primacy over Europe is no longer benefiting either Europe or the United States. As you just said, Alexander, this oxy war with Russia is actually backfiring, hurting Europe, and in turn hurting the United States. And they will not be able to achieve this. And if they continue pursuing this, it will be to their own detriment. And so what is really irrational is the idea of the United States representing a tiny percentage of the global population.

The G7 combined is only 10% of the population versus BRICS, which is at least 45%. And I was just looking at the BBC, and they were calling it a Russian conference instead of a BRIC's meeting. It's very bizarre. And this is where they're locked into delusion, where they're locked. they cannot admit the reality of what is happening and they cannot change their policy accordingly. Yeah. This is morally and intellectually bankrupt thinking. It's definitely morally bankrupt, by the way, and we shouldn't lose sight of that.

But it's going to land us with massive problems in Ukraine because what we're going to see is we're going to end up in a situation where the Russians win in Ukraine. They're going to be very, very angry. They are very, very angry. With the West and with Europe, their armies will be there on our eastern borders.

We will have a return, not to the tensions of the Cold War period, what we will have are far worse tensions than that. Because during the Cold War, it was basically a falling out of the World War II allies. There'd never been a situation where the Soviets and the Americans had waged proxy wars like the Ukraine war against each other. There'd never been suggestions of launching missiles into, you know, the Russians launching missiles of the United States or the Americans launching missiles into Russia. It's a far, far more angry, more difficult situation than the one at the end, the what we had during the Cold War, which I lived through, by the way. I mean, I remember the Cold War. So, we have no capacity to think out, think through this. There are options. There are alternatives we could adopt, but we can't. And in the meantime, what is it doing to Ukraine? Now, why are the Ukrainians going along?

Why are they fighting? You've been following, you've been tracking the events on the ground. Do you think they have any military options that could turn the situation around or at least stabilize it? We often hear about people talking about stabilising the front lines. I read in the telegraph yesterday some optimistic Western official. He was always a British official, I'm sure, saying, well, Well, you know, we should work to try to stabilize the front lines in Pakrovsk and Kusk, so that the Ukrainians are able to hold on to there.

And then sometime in 25, 2026, the whole situation will turn around. And then it will be the Russians who will be exhausted. Do you see any sign of any of this, that, you know, that Ukraine can hold out in Pakrovsk and Kuzk? Because I can't, but what are your thoughts? No, I cannot. either. And we've been talking about this for now years, the importance of the military industrial base of Russia versus the collective West. The reason why the Russian military industrial base is

so strong compared to the collective West's, the inability for the West to change this in any reasonable amount of time, we're talking years and years. And that's if they made the hard decisions to really fix it. Right now, they're across the board resisting. It's systemic. They need to nationalize their arms industry. And they need to turn them into state-owned enterprises that prioritize production over profits. And they will never do this. They're not even talking about doing this.

And so they're just trying to expand production as much as possible within the system that is in place right now, which makes it physically impossible to do. I would say if from Russia's point of view, the quicker they can get this done, the better because it's not as if the collective West isn't expanding production at all in certain instances they are. But as that report pointed out, in certain instances,

they're still in decline. There's certain aspects of the West's industrial base that is still in decline. Militarily, Ukraine has nothing they're able to do. The industrial base affects arms and ammunition. So they have been suffering from shortages. As Russia continues to expand its arms and ammunition, the number of vehicles, the number of weapons, the number of ammunition, the number of not just the number of weapons, but the number of types of weapons continues to increase on Russia's side. And then there's the manpower. I was just because I was wondering, why are they so obsessed with 10 to 12,000 North Korean troops supposedly going to Ukraine? It doesn't make any sense to me. I'm not ruling anything out, but it doesn't, at face value, doesn't make any sense.

And I was looking at a business insider article that talked about admitting Russia is recruiting 30,000 new troops per month, per month. And it's to the point where they admit, and it's the Institute for the Study of War admitting this, they're able to conduct routine operational level rotations, which Ukraine is incapable of doing. And so arms and ammunition, trained manpower, expanding on Russia's side, contracting on Ukraine's side. So the situation on the battlefield has been getting worse. worse, and it's not in a linear manner. It is exponential, is going to accelerate in favor of Russia

to Ukraine's detriment. So no, there's nothing militarily they could do except possibly Western intervention in the hope that Russia will hesitate striking some sort of buffer zone the collective West sets up in a very similar way they've done in eastern Syria. Which is exactly what Ukraine is trying to achieve. It's trying to get the West direction. involved in the war. I mean, that was ultimately what Zelensky's victory plan is all about. What are your thoughts about this? Because, of course, if the West does become directly involved in a war, they're at war with Russia. Putin has said so. I mean, if they even start, you know, launching missiles into Russia, they're at war with Russia. Then it ceases to be a proxy war anymore.

And the point you made at the start of the program is that for the US, this has been a comfortable situation up to now because it is a proxy war. It's not suffering directly any manpower losses. But if it becomes a direct war, that changes. Do you think the West is prepared to go all that way? After all, as we've seen, they're not prepared to change their policy. They just continue to reinforce failure in Ukraine. Are they going to say to themselves, defeat is not an option, so we must go and intervene directly? This is what's so concerning. The Collective West has not been in this position in recent history.

They have always held a dominant position globally. And now they're faced with a situation where global power is shifting irreversibly away from them. And it's unpredictable what they will do. The desperation that is setting in, you can see it. You can hear it when they talk. You can see it when they're writing columns, news articles. editorials. So we don't know exactly what they will do. The problem that the collective West has is they don't have the weapons and ammunition to send to Ukraine. They don't have it for themselves

to go fight Russia either. They do have certain aspects of military power that they have not used yet, such as their air power. But their air power suffers from all the same problems, all of their other high-tech precision guided weapons suffers from. They have a finite number of them. They cannot produce them in large numbers. Once they use them, that's it. They have no way to replace their stockpiles. When they lose their aircraft, if they lose their aircraft in a conflict with Russia, they cannot replace these quickly. And so they will be locking in their military power in Eastern Europe, in Ukraine, whether they go to war with Russia or not. And this is going to force them to forfeit efforts to reassert primacy over the Middle East and Asia Pacific. If they're unable to do,

do that. The entire world is going to continue pivoting away from this U.S.-led unipolar world order toward a multipolar world order. And what we've seen in Syria, despite the U.S., establishing a successful buffer zone in eastern Syria, the situation globally is undermining their position there. And year by year, they're in a weaker position despite having established that buffer zone. I can see something very similar happening, even if they were successful. And even if Russia did hesitate to continue operations following the establishment of such a bumper zone. So in the long term, I just don't see how it's viable. I should say I was contacted separately by several former Air Force people,

and they all tell me the same thing, that if you take on the Russian Air Defense Force and the Russian Air Force over Ukraine, you would suffer horrendous losses. The Russians do not have the reach to extend their air power over NATO territory. But if we risk it over theirs in effect, we would suffer appalling losses, losses which, as you absolutely rightly say, we would not be able to replace in any acceptable timeframe. And I ought to say, by the way, that people talk a lot about Western air power. it's not in quite the good shape that some people think.

The British Air Force, I happen to know, is short of pilots. And it's increasingly short of usable aircraft as well. And I understand the situation is even worse in Germany. It's a bit better in France. And I gather the US is having problems too. So you would be taking on a very powerful, very well-experienced adversary now with not just aircraft, a very effective air defence missiles. And it would not be an easy battle. It would be incredibly difficult, very, very dangerous battle.

And you would lose a very, very high proportion of your air force. I mean, they give them guesstimates, which I'm not going to give here, because that might give away more than I wanted to do. But anyway, there it is. So that was what they said. So we are losing in Ukraine. We have no real way of turning things around. We're not prepared to urge the Ukrainians to negotiate.

We're not going to get the Ukrainians to negotiate for us. The Ukrainians don't want to negotiate because that's the message that Zelensky gave. So we're going to end up with a Russian victory. Have you any idea what they're. implies what would a Russian victory here look like? Because this is one of the questions. Lots of people are asking. I had a discussion yesterday with Professor Meersheimer and Glenn Deeson, and we were all struggling to try to come up with an idea of what exactly a Russian victory would look like in Ukraine. Can you give us your thoughts about that, Brian?

Well, I just want to bring up an excellent video you and Alex did recently called title, Nukes on the Brain. And it was about Zelensky's NATO or Nukes proposition. And you were talking about the Budapest memorandum and how it's claimed that Russia violated it. But then you laid out how in every sense of the way it was violated first and foremost by the collective West. And this is a problem that Russia has with the collective West. They cannot be negotiated. with, even if they came to the table today and agreed to every term that Russia put forward, there's no way Russia could trust any of this without ironclad guarantees. And I mean realities on the ground that would make it physically impossible for the West

to renege on their agreements. And so that, I think, is where Russia is right now. They understand that no matter what is agreed to, everything is just going to be reversed and double down on no matter what agreement they come to. So unfortunately, it looks like there is this obligation on Russia's part where they need to possibly take up to Kiev, for example. But I don't know how long that's going to take. It's very hard to gauge when a city is going to fall,

when a front line is going to crumble. We can see that it's crumbling. and there's nothing they could do to stop it, but how long until Russia would be able to say take Kiev? And what would the collective West? Because the collective West isn't just going to sit there and do nothing while that happens. So it's a very difficult situation Russia is in. I would say if the lines were frozen where they are now,

I don't think that really would be a victory for Russia because then this whole thing, this whole cycle would kick off again, as it has over and over again. So that is a very difficult, that's a very difficult, question. And Russia is confronted with the Ukraine now openly talking about developing nuclear weapons and this idea of Ukraine being in NATO. This is just an idea that the collective West is obsessed with and will never give up until there is no Ukraine to join NATO in the first place. I should say, Gordon Hahn has written a really good piece about this. It says that everything

has been sacrificed. Ukraine has been sacrificed. Eastern Europe is being sacrificed, the security of Europe is being sacrificed to this obsession to constantly expand NATO, that this is the principle that they will never, never waver from. But going back to what you said about Russian thinking, Putin gave what I thought was one of his most revealing press conferences about Ukraine ever in Kazan in advance of the Briggs summit. He was asked a lot of questions, and he made exactly the points that you made. He said, we cannot accept a so-called peace, which will just be a cessation of hostilities before the next war. We have the only kind of peace that can work for us is one which is permanent, one which we can absolutely rely upon.

He also said that there is no conceivable respect that we're going to put a date on when the special military operation ends. That's not for us to do. And as far as we are concerned, we have the means and the resources to keep going as we are pretty much indefinitely. And if it is in our interests to do that, we will. So he was actually very, very clear on precisely the points that you've just made. Now, what I was thinking of when I asked you my question is, how do you expect the battle to go? Because I mean, I get the sense that the front lines are now starting to weaken. I agree with you what you said, that, you know, this is an exponential process.

But do you expect a sort of sudden collapse of the front lines? Daniel Davis, when I spoke with him a few days ago, he said that he thinks that the Russians at some point will start big arrow moves. In other words, fast advances once the front lines collapse. But anyway, what are your thoughts on this, Brian? Or have we lost him? We lost Brian, Alexander. One sec, one sec. Oh, dear.

Let me see if he's sent a message or something. No. No. No. Oh, dear. He'll be back on. He'll be back on. He'll be back on. He'll be back on.

Yeah. He'll be back on. Yeah. Gosh. But there we are. The Keel report, by the way, is absolutely fascinating reading. I mean, I was just, I mean, as Brian says, it's what we've been saying.

for years now that the West will never be able to match Russian, let alone Chinese industrial prowess. But the extent of the failure is still astonishing to me. I was reading through the report and I was looking for some evidence that there's been an actual uptick in arms production in the West in some field. And the only place that I saw, I mean, I've only skimmed the report, so I may be wrong here. But the only place I could identify

where there's been actual evidence of an increase in production is in shell production in the United States. And that's about it. The single figure that astonished me most is that production of anti-aircraft missile interceptors for US Navy ships

is now down to talk. 12 a year, 12. Yeah, but can they match the shell production of Russia? No. Well, I mean, shell production is running at 38,000 a month, apparently, in the US at the moment. Russian production is said to be 350,000 a month. That's the difference. There you go.

And Europe can't produce anything. No, no. And Europe can't produce anything. It's too expensive. It's too expensive. It's that simple. Well, it goes into that as, it goes into that as well. Brian is back.

Did you get me, Brian? My internet completely went out, so now I had a switch to my phone. So sorry about that. I have no idea what happened. It's usually very reliable. So it figures. It happens. Brian, did you get, did you get my question?

Because the last part of it was this. I was asking you how you, I mean, how you imagine. the battlefield, the battlefield situation to be evolving. David Davis, who is of course an ex-military person, a military officer, he thinks. Daniel Davis. Daniel Davis, sorry, Daniel Davis, not David Davis. David Davis is a British politician, very different person.

Daniel Davis, his idea is the front lines will at some point crack, holes will then start to appear in the front lines, the Russians will then move over, we'll start piercing them, and we'll start what he called big arrow offensives, and we'll start to engage in maneuver warfare. That was what he thought, and he thought that at that point, we would start to see ground being covered much more rapidly than we have seen up to now.

Do you think this is a plausible scenario, or do you think, as others do, that they will just continue in the way they have been doing incrementally, taking one town at a time, one place at a time, or what? Yes, I think they're going to continue doing what they've been doing. There were a lot of predictions about winter offensives throughout the year, every single year, and they just never came. And it's just been a case of incremental, methodical, advancing along the line of contact.

It's a war of attrition. This is how Russia is winning this conflict. They're winning it by preserving their manpower while diminishing their adversaries' manpower faster than the Ukrainians can replenish it, faster than their collective West sponsors can replenish it. Their arms, ammunition, and trained to manpower. And so as long as this formula is working for them, I don't see why they would change it unless something absolutely necessitated them, taking a risk and then,

trying to accelerate the timetable, which could or could not, may or may not work. It could end in disaster. We saw how the initial push by Russia into Ukraine, how that went, but that is not the same battlefield that we see today. No matter how few Ukrainians there are along the line of contact, there are these drones, there are landmines, there's anti-tank weapons, there's anti-aircraft weapons. And as long as they have even just a handful of these. It makes a methodical, slow, incremental approach better, superior for Russia to continue using.

I mean, what is extraordinary to me is that when you follow the battlefield, it has the feeling of a drafts game. You move a piece, you gradually work to encircle pieces. It's not just one step at a time. It's very carefully thought out steps one at a time. And it's strange, it's fascinating to see how the Russians first isolate a fortified position. They avoid trying to attack it head on. And then gradually they cut off all the supply routes. And then the whole thing basically collapses into their hands.

That's exactly what happened with Ugladar just a few weeks ago. As I said, they did not launch a direct assault on it. They tried that in 2022, and it didn't work. So this time, they sort of cut all the roots, if you like, and the tree fell down by itself. And I think they will continue using this approach. And as Ukraine's combat power continues to diminish, we're going to see dynamics that we don't yet see.

And we can actually see this developing in a way. But Vuglodar was such a heavily fortified position that Ukraine held at the EFTA was such a heavily fortified city. It was almost unimaginable that it would ever fall. But because it's not just what Russia is doing on the ground around these particular cities, it is the overall attrition that Ukraine is suffering that is inhibiting its ability to continue defending these cities. So I think that's the way it's going. to continue regarding all of these other cities that if Russia decides it wants to to take these cities, that's how it's going to work. If they cannot get it directly, they're going to just

continue wearing Ukraine down overall to where then they will be able to change the facts on the ground at these particular cities. And maybe it'll develop in that way up to the NEPA river or beyond the Dneepa River, I don't know. I honestly don't know what Russia is thinking or what their final plan is for this operation. Putin gave what I thought was the first strong hint that they might be thinking to cross the Dnieper River. He said that in order to complete this campaign, they may have to go beyond the territory of the four regions. Now, that could, of course, relate to Kharkov, which is not part of the four regions, but it seemed to me more plausible, given the context, that he was thinking more of a move towards the NEPA, which would make complete sense. And if they go to the

NEPA, then logically, I would have thought, given the way the NEPA works, crossing the NEPA itself, might be what they would next have to do. But anyway, these are speculations. So let's just touch on another issue, which is about the battlefronts. The Coast Corporation, are we likely to see Ukraine try to pull off any more of those? My sense of it is that it's turned into a complete debacle. But again, what is your view? Well, when it first was launched, many people on both sides were reacting very emotionally. Pro-Russian commentators were,

very angry, how could this possibly happen? Pro-Ukrainian commentators were gloating about what a tremendous victory this was. But if you just stop, and of course, you and Alex did this the moment it was unfolding, many other analysts did this. If you look objectively, if they're unable, Ukrainians are unable to hold the line of contact, where their fortifications are, where their supply lines are, how are they going to put? push into Russia away from the line of contact, away from their supply lines, their fortifications. How are they going to do that? And how is this operation going to be sustainable in any way?

And the first thing that was abundantly clear was that they've committed thousands of their best troops, best equipment, to this incursion purely for political optics. I can't even think of what else it could possibly have been for. because they are so outnumbered, outdone, and they are being outfought to such a degree along the line of contact that there was no possibility of this diverting Russian forces. It just didn't seem plausible at all. And then almost as soon as it happened, the collective West's media even began reporting Ukrainians themselves complaining about how much worse it got along the actual line of contact

because Ukraine decided to strip all of these troops and this equipment off to go do their incursion into Korsk. So if Ukraine decides to do more of these, it's only going to accelerate the collapse of Ukraine's fighting capacity. And that's what we saw with Korsk, and that's what we're going to see if there's any additional operations like it. You would just thought that there would be people in Ukraine who understood that, that the military leadership there, at least, however competent or not competent they are, would have that level of understanding to know that if you are overextended already, then the last thing you should do is overextend yourself even more. I mean, I just, again, I bind myself with this war,

constantly confronted with problems. I just don't understand. and the Pentagon apparently was, anyway, they claim now they were concerned about it. Why didn't they tell the Ukrainians to stop? You know, when I hear the U.S. make these claims, I can only imagine that it's for plausible deniability or to shift blame because the United States is so deep into every aspect of Ukraine politically, militarily, in terms of intelligence.

that there are no decisions that Ukraine is making that the U.S. is unaware of. And I doubt any decision being made that isn't ultimately a decision made first in Washington and then translated in Ukraine. And so there must have been a purpose for the course incursion. And maybe just to keep it going to think about how it did. I mean, this was one thing that it absolutely did do. It boosted morale. And morale was so bad before the court's incursion that, you know, eunuch cohesion was collapsing.

There's growing desertion. I mean, they're right back to that point now already, plus the demoralizing effect that the failure of the incursion has had. But it was a temporary boost that maybe from their point of view was worth a try to try to try to boost morale, because otherwise there may be, Maybe they are worried about a large scale collapse along the line of contact in terms of discipline, unicohehesion, and morale. So maybe that's why they did it. That's the only thing I can imagine. Do you mind if we, it's slightly beyond our envelope, but I mean, I would like, if you don't mind,

just touch on the Middle East situation because I'm going to give my own rather tough-minded interpretation of the latest military events, which is that Israel is in a war and attrition in Gaza. It's in a war of attrition in South Lebanon. It's assassinated various people. It has achieved absolutely nothing by any one of these moves. It is now preparing to take on Iran. And Iran has demonstrated it has a very effective missile capability. I sense, I don't know whether you agree that the 1st October strike came as more than a surprise, almost as a shock, both to the Americans and to the Israelis. And, well, you've been saying it. Now the Kiel report is confirming it.

We're out of air defense missiles. So if we're going to get into a missile war with the Iranians, if Israel is and the United States is, we're desperate. pretty short of air defense missiles. Why, what is your take of this? I mean, it seems to be this is another example of us lurching into a sort of situation of bankruptcy. It's a little bit like the early weeks of the special military operation, huge euphoria about what the Ukrainians appear to be doing until the moment comes when the reality

sinks in and we turn out that the facts are otherwise. Well, as you're describing, Israel is another country pursuing a foreign policy and military operations that don't actually serve its own best interests. It is exhausting its military forces. It is fighting a multi-front war. Why are they doing this? Because just like Ukraine, they are a proxy. The United States cultivates proxies in each region of the world that's trying to control and project power into. and Israel is to the Middle East, what Ukraine is to Eastern Europe. And so this is why Israel is pursuing an irrational military and foreign policy. That said, yes, the air defense systems across the collective West have been depleted before the special military operation began.

Saudi Arabia was begging its neighbors for missiles because the United States couldn't supply them missiles fast enough for their war with Ansarala. Yemen, that that was drones and missiles and rockets, and not really that many even, relative to what we see in Ukraine now. Iran has demonstrated that it has the ability to precisely target positions in Israel with large numbers of missiles that can overwhelm Israel's air defense system. We have both talked about the FAD, long-range, anti-ballistic missile system, the U.S. is moaning. They have seven, I believe, seven batteries, and they're sending only one possibly two. And we've talked about how the numbers don't add up, how that still will not be

enough to stop even one of these waves. Missiles will get through. The fact that the Collective West itself believes Iran has 3,000, maybe more missiles. The U.S. has nowhere near this many interceptors. even if one interceptor could with 100% accuracy destroy one incoming missile, they still would not have enough. But in reality, it usually takes two or more interceptors to destroy one incoming missiles. So they have painted themselves into this corner. If you look at it in, say, a 20, 30, 40-year block following the Cold War, the United States rushed to try to sweep away all of these nations with independent foreign policies. They talked about seven countries,

five years. We remember retired General Wesley Clark referring to that. It looks like they just ran out of time. And it looks like global military, economic and political power has shifted quicker than they have been able to reassert control over the planet, as had been their objective. And so this is where they are now, this corner they've painted themselves into pursuing global primacy without the actual means to achieve it. And if this is the failure that they're having in Europe and the Middle East, what is it going to look like if they continue pushing China in the Asia-Pacific region? And one last thing I want to say about this is that because it's so unlikely that they're going to succeed

using conventional means, this is what makes me worry when I hear Ukraine talk about nuclear weapons or the fact that Israel has nuclear weapons and the U.S. is investing, a lot to convince the world that it does not have control over what Israel ultimately does. This is what worries me because the only other option that they have is something more extreme than conventional weapons. Indeed. So, I mean, that was the question. That was my last question going to be to you, which is that what do we do when it becomes

obvious to everybody that the emperor has no clothes? that we don't have the industrial capacity to produce weapons, that we are lurching into wars with powers that do have that industrial capacity, and that we do not have the technological supremacy, which every Westerner that I know takes for granted, by the way, they still do. They still imagine that technologically we're ahead when, as I said, the facts on the ground,

if I can put it like that, show otherwise. So do we at that point come to our senses, or do we continue to escalate in unfathomely dangerous ways? Well, I think you've answered that question. But if you wanted to just add anything, I'd be grateful. I think it will be the latter. And I think they will continue pursuing extremely dangerous, desperate policies until a time when, alternate circles of interest across the collective West can displace the current interests. So when we look at the United States, just for an example, look at Boeing, Boeing Corporation,

this corrupt and incompetence company that cannot boost production of Patriot missiles. It's a starliner spacecraft completely failed. Their commercial aircraft, they have almost a monopoly, a doopoly, a doopoly with, with Airbus. And they can't even maintain that. And what is the trajectory of Boeing? I see it only unraveling as better alternatives appear. Maybe not in the collective West, but around the rest of the world. And eventually, there's going to be a period in time where the West is isolated itself through these policies, through these actions, and the rest of the world is just going to move on without them. There will be circles of interest in the collective West that will emerge. Is it,

Is it a collapse that the West will face when these interests, kind of their global standing collapses? Will it collapse back at home? Will there be alternatives? I don't know. But what I hope is that more constructive interests displaced these current interests, and then they can engage with the rest of the world in a more constructive way, as I always say, alongside the rest of the world,

rather than attempting to impose themselves upon the rest of the world. Brian Belletti, thank you very much for answering my questions. I'm going to hand over to Alex. I'm sure he's got some questions from the viewers to put to you. On Boeing, by the way, we must discuss one day aerospace questions because, as you know, both China and Russia have massive aerospace programs. And in a few years' time, we're going to see long-range wide bodies coming out of both of those countries. Yes, absolutely.

Thank you. Brian, you have some time to answer some of. Questions from viewers? Yes, yes, I do. Yes. Great. Great. From from Cain, I'd say the U.S. has already won the war in Ukraine. They have weakened to the EU and made it dependent on the U.S. again rather than be a competitor. I think that is a valid point. That is a valid point. If you looked at what was going on before the U.S. prompted the special military operation, the EU was pivoting away from U.S. prime. They were working their way. out from under the shadow of U.S. hegemony that had been cast over since the end of World War II. We saw Nord Stream 2. We saw the U.S. going through extreme measures to try to cancel it, including putting sanctions on Germany itself. We saw the EU working closer and closer with China, including possibly on the Belt and Road project. And I had hoped that Europe would complete that pivot and follow their best

interests. But unfortunately, I underestimated the political capture the U.S. has achieved over Europe, over its institutions. People, we talk a lot about the NED, open society, and how they're targeting nations all around the rest of the world. But first and foremost, they exert that same type of influence over Europe, over countries they consider allies. These think tanks are all funded and controlled ultimately by U.S.-based special interests. So, that cannot be underestimated. Their political capture of Europe has been solidified by this. But at what cost?

Look at Europe. That's what I would say at what cost and look at Europe now. Ralph Steiner says, the yanks are pushing the luck of the Ukrainians to the edge this winter. Are the yanks prepared for the Kersk pocket to totally implode this winter? I don't know if it will totally implode, But what I will say is that Russia does not seem to be hurrying to eliminate this pocket. It is extremely sparsely populated.

There is nothing there. And as long as Ukraine has to support thousands and thousands of troops operating there, stretched across the battlefield, the better it is for Russia. It's easier for them to degrade their forces there than if they fell back behind the line of contact, to properly prepared fortification. So it could collapse this winter just because of Ukraine's overall fighting capacity collapsing,

but I don't think that Russia is making that a priority. Can I just intrude here by saying the group of forces north, which is the force that is actually fighting the Ukrainians in the Quds pocket, has made precisely those points themselves, which Brian has just made, that this is a very sparsely inhabited region,

that it's all forests and streams, very, very few roads, that it's a black hole in to which the Ukrainian army disappears, and that it's entirely in Russia's interests to keep it going in that way. A group of forces north has a very, very interesting site, by the way, on Telegraph, which is very uncharacteristic of Russian military sites, official Russian military sites because it has a personality and it actually discusses questions like

that. But they've just said in places exactly what Brian has just been saying. So there you have it. That's the actual thinking of the Russian army that is fighting the Ukrainians exactly there. Nikos says Duran and Brian, what do you say about North Korean troops in the SMO, which is true? I think it is the dumbest possible thing Russia could have done. I was just having a conversation with Scott, I've calibrated about this. And we were talking about how, again, the Western media admits Russia is recruiting 30,000 Russian soldiers every single month

and that they have so many soldiers that they can rotate them, which Ukraine cannot. They have soldiers that have been fighting for five years straight and have not had a break yet, stretching all the way back before the special military. operation began. And then we were talking about how, you know, what is the benefit versus the tradeoff of having North Korean troops moved all the way to Ukraine? These are soldiers who don't understand the language. Russians and Ukrainians can communicate. They're familiar with this area.

North Koreans would be completely unfamiliar. And people pointed out that, well, North Korean weapons and Russian weapons are very similar. So maybe it could be useful. But someone in the comment section said, just take your phone that you are familiar with, your smartphone, and just switch the language, and then try to do everything on your phone that you already know how to do how much more difficult that becomes. And so there are so many tradeoffs for 10 to 12,000 troops to bring them over versus the 30,000 every month they're already getting from across Russia. So it doesn't make sense. I can't rule it out, but doesn't make any sense, not with the information I have. I completely agree. It doesn't make any sense to me at all. I think probably the Russian and North Korean troops in the far east of Russia engaging in joint exercises and training programs. But I have absolutely, I'm absolutely sure they have nothing to do with the conflict in Ukraine. That doesn't make any sense. And I saw somewhere that some of the pictures that have been produced supposedly showing North Korean troops,

training in Russia, taking on Russian uniforms, are actually Laotian troops who were involved in a recent exercise there, and that these photos have just been produced to make it out that they're North Koreans, which would not surprise me. It doesn't make any kind of sense to me. And just like Brian, I do think there's any truth to this. Raphael says, my biggest fear is the West is missing how Russia is getting ready to counter whatever they want to do. Russia, not Putin, is ready for everything. I think that's a good point because the Western media makes it out as President Putin, President Xi, one-man show in each country,

despite the vast territories that both countries encompass, the huge populations both countries comprise of. And it really is Russia having come together as a nation for this special military operation in a way that surprised, I don't know why it should have surprised many, Western commentators, but it has surprised them that the fact that the sanctions didn't work. This is something that's under Duran, you have really talked about a lot over the course of the special military operation, the failure of the sanctions because of the resilience of the Russian people.

Nico says the West wants an excuse to send troops in Russia, and now Russia gave them one with the North Korea will be seen as weak and this war will happen again and again. So yeah, one of the reasons the North Korea narrative was put out there is so that the West can, that's essentially what Nicos is saying, so that the West can, that push to get their troops into Ukraine. Do you guys agree? I thought that. No, go ahead. I was going to say that I thought that, but also I saw South Korea using this as a pretext to re-explore the possibility of sending weapons to Ukraine, but as if it's going to make a different. Sorry, Alexandra, go ahead. No, I agree with that.

I mean, I should say that this is partly what the objective was. But it's not going to change the picture, because, first of all, I don't think there going to be any North Korean troops in Ukraine. I don't think this is a story that's going to be sustained for very long because it can't be. And ultimately, if you're talking about Western publics, they don't want to fight in Ukraine, whether it's against the Russians or North Koreans or anyone else. And that is the fundamental problem that all Western governments face. GL-1416 says, how does an occupation in war generally work?

What happens to the people living there? How are they administered? Say, for example, in the special military operation. For the special military operation, I don't think it's fair to describe it as an occupation. Ukraine has historically been part of Russia. The people that are supposedly being occupied by Russian forces are basically Russian. Most of the majority of them speak Russian. A lot of them identify as Russian.

So is it an occupation or is it more like a civil war? I would tend to think that's more like the latter if I had to classify it as one or the other. I agree with that completely, by the way. I don't think that people in the Donbass would see themselves as occupied. I don't get to say that, or Crimea, certainly not. In other places where there are occupations, there is a very elaborate system of law, international law, which is supposed to govern how operations,

military occupations, are administered. Of course, those laws are hardly ever enforced in practice, but just to say. Sanjava says, greetings, Brian Berletic, India, China, border, agreement, a game changer for Bricks? What do you think about Egypt, a recipient of massive U.S. military funds being in Bricks? Also, if it has massive problems with Ethiopia. Egypt is complicated, and I have experienced this with people asking questions about Thailand, because historically people imagine Thailand has been a very close ally of the United States,

but in a lot of ways, they weren't given a choice during the Vietnam War. It was either host U.S. troops or be the next country on the list carpet bombed. And so they chose to host U.S. troops. You have to look at where things are now. Yes, Egypt has this reputation as being a very close U.S. ally and receiving military aid from the U.S. But where exactly do they stand now? What are the percentages versus what support their or relationships they have with Russia, China, and the rest of Bricks. I think just their willingness to want to be in Bricks says a lot about how much has changed in Egypt over the last, say, 10, 15 years. So we have to be very careful. There's a lot of perceptions that we hold because historically, that's what we've been told.

Perhaps those weren't even true when we were being told it, but perhaps it's changed since then. I suspect that's the case for Egypt. Agoo says, is India being unrealistic by trying to please Russia and the global West? Does Modi not realize the U.S. will not allow this? For India, and I think every other country caught in the middle here, they, they, you know, there's a lot of things that the public does not see. The United States has many, many ways to divide and cause upheaval in India. They could do the same thing to India that they've been doing through, say, China, Russia, all of these other countries that they've been targeting.

They're already deeply involved and meddling in politics everywhere. And they would just start doing this in India. Look at how big India is and what a tinderbox it is in terms of ethnic groups, religion. This is how the British Empire left it deliberately. And that's just a disaster waiting to happen. India has to be very careful about that. I think that is one of the reasons they're so careful not to fall too far on one side or the other. Sparky says, Brian, in light of the U.S. blowing up Nord Stream, coming to light in the MSM,

is German President Steinmeier awarding Biden the Grand Cross of the Order of Merit, the most epic book move in history? Well, it was one of your clown worlds, Alex. I mean, it was just unbelievable. You couldn't make, if you made this up in a movie, people would say that's ridiculous. No one will buy that. But that is what has actually happened. So, yes.

But again, the power of America's ability to politically capture another nation. Germany is a perfect example. They are, and Ukraine, they're both collectively walking off a cliff together because of America's political capture of their institutions. Yeah. Ralph Steider says, Hollywood films such as, saving private Ryan, make the Yanks seem invisible, but could the Yanks go up against a peer adversary one-on-one and win? Actually, Ralph Steiner says shaving Ryan's private, as I got mixed up with the movie. Anyway, Ralph has a wicked humor. Can the Yanks go up against

the peer adversary one-on-one and win? That's the question. Alexander was talking earlier about people contacting him about the state of West. and air power. I just want to remind people the last time the United States went up against a nation that had formidable hair defenses was Vietnam. They lost 10,000 aircraft, fixed wing and rotary aircraft, 10,000. And so they understand the danger of going up against an adversary that can actually fight back. In Syria, they have been very careful. Them, the European powers that had participated and Israel conduct standoff strikes on Syria because Syria has an air defense capability enough to down Western fighters, including, I guess, the F-35 because they still are

conducting standoff attacks. So this is this thing that I've been talking about, the pivot of military power, the pivot of technology and the balance of power being tilted because of it away from the West. They no longer enjoy this disparity and military power that they had once enjoyed, and that they still try to convince the world that they have. Alexander G. says, hello, Brian, Alex,

Alexander, hashtag Mama Alaska, have a blessed day due to Ralph Alexander G. Raphael says, people, Russia is 70 kilometers away from Kiev. 70 kilometers. very close.

And William says, the only way the Western elites have got away with their appalling conduct is through censorship and narrative control. Without that, one million people would be marching through London and other capitals. That would be.

Yes. It's a very good point. On the subject, I'll just go back to the point about the Russians being 70 kilometers from Kiev, the roads apparently are very difficult. if the Russians were to advance on Kiev, there are other roads which the distance is greater,

but they would probably have to advance through. One of the reasons that they had so many problems back in 2022 was that they were using the smaller roads, which really weren't very good and weren't suitable for large numbers of troops to move around. So it's quite straightforward. Sanjeva says people have no appetite for Western intervention in Ukraine. Australia has the wealthiest people in the world. Even we are struggling with cost of living.

So other countries, people will not be okay with additional costs of war. And actually this point about censorship, because we are all feeling the pressure getting greater because of Western censorship, all of us who are in danger of being. deleted at any any day now and that is because they feel they are losing they they used to have tremendous confidence you always used to say these other countries censoring shutting down different networks and platforms it's because they're weak but now it's the collective west resorting to all of this and and it's precisely because they're

actually weak umg puppy says any comments about the india china agreement today about their border. Will India be added in the West's enemies lists, our events in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka, and encirclement? Well, I will say quickly this. I haven't seen the text of this. I don't know how complete this agreement is. If it is what it appears to be, it is a game changer. And Jeffrey Sachs, by the way, a year ago on our program, and he's fairly well informed, both on the Indian and the Chinese side, predict. it would happen. So, I mean, this would be a huge event, but because it would take away the major issue of contention between India and China. But I have to see this agreement first, and I have to understand what exactly it is. Ralph Steiner says British Empire's Challenger

Three Tanks will be ready in a couple of years. Will the British and Yangs be prepared by 2006 for a delayed operation? Unthinkable. This is absolutely one for you. Brian. The Challenger 3 is just a modified, modernized Challenger 2. And we saw how well the Challenger, or how unwell the Challenger 2 performs in Ukraine. And the Challenger 3 will be available in even smaller numbers. It'll be more specialized, have more equipment that they would have to teach the Ukrainians on or the British themselves would be using. So no, it's not viable. And as Alexander has said many times today in his programs, the state of the British military is,

I would describe it as terminal decline, almost implosion, just every aspect of it. It is, in reality, I mean, it had this momentum of global empire behind it. I believe that momentum has screeched to a halt, and this is the predictable outcome. Mr. Kim.com. Is this real kim dot com?

Wow, it is. Hello, Mr. Kim.com. Duran, Brian, will Israel attack Iran while the BRICS summit is taking place? Impossible to know that that's something we can't predict. And I've had people ask me why this delay? Why didn't Israel retaliate? And as Alexander and Alex, you both pointed out, they have had this planned for years and years.

The U.S. in Israel have had plans and contingencies for years of attacking Iran. So why didn't they? I honestly believe it's operational. They're trying to think of what to do about missile retaliation. And because they're at a point where only the most extreme options are left, they have to think very carefully, very carefully before exercising them. Alexander, your thoughts? No, I agree with that.

I think that the first October Iranian strike did come as a shock. I think that they were very, very surprised that the Iranians could target facilities so precisely, specifically the Nevitin base and that their missiles got through. And we've had admissions in places like the Financial Times and the Daily Telegraph that up to 36 Iranian missiles hit the Nevitim air base. Now, that is a lot of missiles hitting the air base, and it's quite likely, I would not be surprised if they did a lot more damage than has been reported as well.

So I think that this is what is giving people pause. Certainly they have those plans, but now they're worried that they're taking on an adversary that is more sophisticated and more powerful, than they ever imagined it could be. Alexei, I just want to ask you a quick question before we move on. And I don't know, Brian, if you would like to comment on it. Alexander, in your video, you were talking about decapitation strikes.

I know we mentioned it in a video we did on the Duran. How much more likely do you see that is happening? Just a follow-up to .com question. This is the buzz that's going on inside Israel now, that what they're going to do. And it makes, if you follow the, the, if you follow that kind of thinking, it has a sort of logic, which is that you try to eliminate the leadership, the political and military leadership of your adversary, and you think

that that's somehow going to solve your problems. That's what they've been trying to do with Hamas in Gaza. That's what they've just tried to do with Hezbollah in South Lebanon. It didn't work in either case, but there are definitely some people in Israel who seem to be talking about trying to do that with Iran. Why they think it's going to work with Iran, I have no idea. Iran is a huge state, it's got a powerful bureaucracy, huge armed forces, the idea that you could simply eliminate a few important people, and that will cause the whole thing to collapse like a house of cards seems to me borderline absurd. But if you are in the grip of this kind of thinking,

then perhaps you can just about understand it. I would just add, it's this arrogance, despite everything that they've seen in Ukraine, in the Middle East, what they see China's capabilities emerging as they still have this arrogance where they believe that they're still superior and they still can prevail. Just as Alexander said, they took out the Secretary General of Hezbollah, but they've done this twice.

The first time they did this, Israeli forces ended up expelled out of southern Lebanon. They just did it again, and now they're mired in fighting along the border. They're not going to have a successful incursion into Lebanon, or if they do, they're going to pay a very high price, and it won't be sustainable. So that clearly is not the answer. just killing a handful of people at the top, they have continuity of leadership. That is how these organizations, any good organization is designed

to have continuity of leadership. But you see, the logic, the reason they would do that is this. They are aware now of the danger of a prolonged war. So they gamble that if they can eliminate the leadership quickly, then that problem won't arise because the other side will simply collapse at that point. Of course, if that gamble turns out wrong,

we cheat wheel, then they've advanced. They've not advanced at all. They still have the war of attrition. And they've simply replaced on the other side one set of leaders with another set of leaders. But when you've booked yourself in, when you said to the world,

you're going to strike back. When you're Israel, which always strikes back, that's part of the sort of image that Israel has for years fostered and built about itself, that it will always hit back and hit back hard. Then, of course, it's very difficult to sit back and do nothing, even though that might be the wise thing to do. Elia Koriakin says, What if Israel is denied Turkish, Iraqi, and Saudi Arabia?

space. Well, I, I, I, what is, sorry, can you just repeat the question? Israel, was it Israel? What if Israel is denied is denied, Turkish, Saudi and Iraqi airspace? Well, which I think is quite likely, but I still think there'll be, they'll find ways to hit at Israel at Iran. First of all, would they pay much attention? Well, while we are, I mean, would if, if, if, uh, Israeli fighter jets, flew over the airspace of some of these countries with these countries.

Turkey is a NATO state. Saudi Arabia still has a kind of alliance with the United States. Would they really shoot these Israeli aircraft down? And anyway, there are probably other means whereby Israel could strike at Iran. It could use its submarines. I mean, this is something which I'm sure Brian knows a lot more about than me. But I still think that the Israelis would find ways around a problem like that. Yeah, I agree.

And one thing I will say is they have written entire papers about how to maintain plausible deniability with Israel crossing this airspace, that airspace. So I think they will one way or the other figure it out. Indeed, that's how they decide to attack. Adadula says lots of respect for you guys. how you all keep your cool, maintain your sanity while watching, and speaking about the craziness that we are witnessing today. My question, where will the persuasive and determined push for peace originate from? Well, the brick states are already trying to push for peace.

The problem is they're not getting any reciprocal response from the West. We need a political change of the kind that Ryan was talking about, in effect of political transformation in the West for people to start to listen. But the fact is the Emperor doesn't have any clothes if you put aside the very immense escalatory dangers, the use of nuclear weapons that Brian was talking about. And inherently, objectively,

the people of the West have only to gain from a rapprochement between the Western nations and the nations beyond. People in the West are not benefiting from these hegemonic plans, but as I said, whether that political transformation will come any time soon, doesn't seem very likely for the moment. Sparky says, Brian, although a hassle, wouldn't it be better for Russia to make all of Ukraine? Russia again to deter Ukrainian government in exile from launching a Bay of Pig style invasion

and spoil Black Rock's plans. Well, I mean, ideally, it would be better if all of Ukraine was under Russian control because that would solve the problem permanently, wouldn't it? But I think Russia would be willing to settle with a section of the far west of Ukraine being some NATO-wise rump state and the vast majority of Ukraine being either part of Russia or as I think it was both of you in an earlier program this week saying something like Belarus for to be like Belarus in other words not part of Russia but aligned with Russia in that manner all right. Latimeros has kudos to Brian for wearing the Durand T-shirt on a

serious note, thank you, gentlemen, for such an interesting discussion. Rob 1 says, just wanted to say thank you for everyone's ongoing work in this space. And Mr. Kim.com says Abba. I think that is the real kim.com. Great, great, great to hear from you, Kim.com. Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much.

Sparky says, Brian, five eyes at all know when specific potential. decision makers watch the truth on the Duran, the New Atlas, etc. Would they disrupt a live stream to keep the truth from specific decision makers? I think I just have a bad internet connection. I just had some bad luck. I don't, honestly, I don't think they, I don't think that they watch any of our programs. If they did, they would stop taking calls from Poroshenko. True, very true.

Let's see. Game of Chair says, Kersk is, well, was Ukraine's Battle of the Bulge? In a way, I think that's a semi-accurate way to describe it. But many things that they do are like the Battle of the Bulge, where they invest huge amounts of resources, they get superficial immediate results, and then at the end of it, it just cost them more

than it was ever worth it, and they're still losing. So, you know. As a historical point, what I discovered, a short while ago, which I didn't know, was that the Battle of the Bulge was not the last German offensive of the Second World War. The Germans conducted two offensives in March, 1945 in Hungary. And those are their last offensives. And one of them was initially quite successful. William says sanctions make EU defense production too costly. many many things make it too costly many factors and by the way i forgot to mention the keel report

discusses a lot of that and it confirms an awful lot of the points that brian was saying it complains about the fragmented nature of the european defense industry doesn't of course say that it's private but it talks about it and it contrasts it with the centralized highly organized Russian system, which, of course, it doesn't want to mention this data. From Sparky Brian, how might Israel employ the fancy whiz-bang radar of the THAAD missile system to their advantage even without missiles? Colonel Douglas McGregor pointed out, it's useful beyond just its missiles. It has a radar that if you integrate it, like Russia's air defense system is integrated.

and everything is talking to each other. So even if they just had the radar, the radar could communicate additional information to the rest of their air defense network if it's all connected and communicating, which it might be because this isn't the first time that has been to Israel. They have sent it to Israel for training, I think, 2019,

at least as early as 2019, precisely for this. But at the end of the day, if your radar knows where every single missile is, but you don't have any missiles to shoot those incoming missiles down with. What good does that do you? Jamila says, hello, gentlemen, warmongers and weapons makers, how long will they control us?

I think their days are numbered. I think their days are definitely numbered. OMG Puppies says, Brzezinski in the Grand Chess Board, 1997, wrote that the point is to prevent an economic union of Europe and Russia. He suggested conflict in Ukraine could split them apart. Well, that's exactly what they've done with the results that we see. They've destroyed Ukraine.

They made Russia move eastwards, shift its focus eastwards. They've caused the Russians to build up huge armed forces, and they've created an economic crisis in Europe. So, Zhiginsky's plan has been a spectacular success. And Sparky says, Brian Sotos helped CIA start NGOs to foment discord in Eastern Europe during the Cold War using currency trading connections. When people point to Soros, aren't they really pointing at the CIA? Yes, and the CIA has used any number of what appeared to be private foundations. Rockefeller was another one.

and they use those as fronts, so it's more difficult to trace the money back to the CIA itself. That's why they created the National Endowment for Democracy. But again, because of the alternative media and the awareness that we've helped raise about the issue, the EDV has actually begun erasing their website, where they had all the disclosures, and now they're being very careful. They're creating fronts, just like the CIA has and still does, to launder the money. So it's more difficult to put it. But again, if you hear people talking about the.

freedom, democracy, and Western values, you know who it is. So it's just a matter of digging deep enough to find the actual paperwork, the paper trail and following it back. All right, a couple more questions for Brian, and then we'll let Brian go, and me and Alexander will answer the rest of the remaining questions. Just a comment from Mattless X on the North Korea story, guys. There was a similar report of North Koreans fighting in Russia last year, and it turned out there were,

they were Buriats or soldiers from Russia's far east. I think I remember that. Yeah, I remember that. Matthew asks, what is the probable end to this mess in Ukraine? I think it will be put true. I think, unfortunately, it will be continued protracted warfare. I think the collective west is happy. As long as they can keep Ukraine bleeding, they will continue doing that.

But then there's a very unpredictable aspect of this. when we don't really know what the collective west will do, because what if Ukraine does begin visibly collapsing? What do they do? Do they intervene and take that huge risk? Imagine if they intervene and they end up backing down from Russia instead of Russia backing down from them. Imagine what that will do to the rest of their designs globally, because this is why they're so deeply entrenched in Ukraine. They're worried about how this is going to affect the Middle East and most importantly, the Asia-Pacific region. What kind of message will this send to the people

they're trying to convince to continue investing in this project? Sparky says, Brian, good point. Maybe Bovan Alexis would be good guests on the Duran or the New Atlas. Thank you very much for that. And Commander Crossfire asks, Brian, is the public in Taiwan as brainwashed, in Taiwan is brainwashed, as is the case in Ukraine to allow for that replay in Asia, wouldn't there be popular pushback?

They're not as brainwashed and they're not as fanatical. That is a good thing. Unfortunately, if you have enough money and time and energy, you can convince any group of people of anything. And they are, they are, the United States is deeply invested in convincing the people living, on the alien province of Taiwan that they want to pursue separatism, even if it is obviously against their own best interest. The economy of Taiwan is dependent on the rest of China. And there is no

substitute for the economic ties that they have with the rest of China. They are Chinese. Even their fake government in Taipei is called the Republic of China. And in their constitution, it even says that Taiwan is just an island province of the rest of China. And so thinking about how badly they brainwashed people to believe this in the first place, even if they're not as fanatical as Ukraine, shows you how powerful Western propaganda is, how dangerous it is, and how, you know, the root of this problem is nations and provinces within nations being unable to protect their information space. So it is problematic. At the end of the day, look at what this has done to Ukraine.

It has not changed anything. Yes, they're fanatical. yes, they want to fight Russia, but at the end of the day, material support is the deciding factor, and that was not working in their favor. And it won't work in Taiwan's favor either. All right. Final question for Brian from John Roberts. It seems to be the Biden administration has largely pushed Asia together

as an entity in opposition to the West. A grand strategy failure, question mark. Yes. And it was inevitable, because, the United States does not have the means to achieve its overarching objective, which is to pursue and achieve global primacy. The other factor at play here is even governments that have been more or less politically captured or influenced or supported by the U.S., they're looking at the U.S. and what is happening, say, in Ukraine, again, this is why they're so concerned about the optics

surrounding Ukraine. And they're looking at China's rise. And even for, I mean, these people are driven by self-interest above all other things. And they're starting to see China as the better option, even with the U.S. influencing them and backing them. So this is dangerous. And yes, it is pushing lots of Asia together as a result. Brian Berletic, the channel is the new Atlas. Thank you very much for joining us on the Duran.

I have all of Brian's links in the description box down below. And I will add them as a pin comment as well. If you're not following Brian and the New Atlas, definitely follow Brian and the new Atlas. Brian, thank you so much for joining us. Absolutely. And thank you again, Brian, for joining us today. Thank you so much for having me and everyone for tuning in. And I will continue watching this as I leave.

Thank you again. Thank you. Thank you, Brian. All right. Fantastic show. Alexander, how you feeling? Are you, do you have energy to knock out the rest of the questions and comments? I will feel energized because I'm knocking up the questions and comments.

All right. I need to welcome to the Duran community. Let's see here. We got through a lot of questions, so I want to just be patient with me as I go through what we've answered. and what we didn't answer. Lorna Dodd, thank you for that super sticker. Nicos says, as I promised, I asked Nerd Rotic and the drinker if they wanted to talk to you. Drinker didn't want to, but Nerdrotic is okay with it.

It's up to you now to approach him. This was for you, my fellow Greeks. Thank you, Nicos, so much for that. Thank you so much for that, Nicos. Ralph says, the Yanks want to control the world, a new world order. but that Yankee jackboot of tyranny on the next of others is tyranny personified. Why do this? All kinds of things that developed in the United States during and after the Second World War,

and with a particularly difficult development with the evolution, the emergence of the neocons in the 1970s. The neocons are basically a group. of intellectuals originating, I think, mainly, mostly in New York, late 60s, early 70s, they then became very useful to the military industrial complex. That gave them the opportunity to set up think tanks and to argue their case in all sorts of places, that in turn enabled them to leverage that power to get into government, and then through government, they gradually managed to take over the institutions, a march through the institutions, as Gramsci would have said.

Patty and Patsy, thank you for that super sticker. From Rakfin M.M. says, question, is Russia managing the newly taken cities, especially ones, how is Russia managing the newly taken cities, especially ones which are less pro-Russia? Or is the civilian population just evacuated before the front? well a lot of people of course do leave before the fighting begins in any particular city but i would have thought in dombas which is where most of the fighting has been you're not going to find many people who are going to want to stay away again i come back to what i said earlier there was an exchange between the daily telegraph

fervidly pro-Ukrainian british newspaper and a resident in maripal and he said look i'm perfectly happy where I am. This is my home. This is where I'm staying. I'm absolutely fine with the Russians being here. It's effectively what he said. Ralph Steiner says, Edward Bernice was pivotal in airbrushing slavery and genocide out of America's past in 1917 to make USA appear the good guys. Are they the good guys? Well, there have been the good guys at some top points in their history, but at the moment, I think they're not doing any very much good in international affairs. Certainly not this administration. This administration is doing terrible things.

Thank you for that. One second, Alexander. I'm going through questions. We answered India and China agreement. We answered the Challenger tanks. Big Wyman, thank you for that super sticker. Tim Gibson, thank you for that. Super sticker.

William says, barring a 360 degrees or is it 180 degrees policy turned by the West, I can't see Russia being able to stop until they're at the Polish border. Well, many people are saying that. And of course, one person who's saying this, and is of an important Russian, is Medvedev. I mean, he's basically talking about going on, moving on all the way to the Polish border. that does come with challenges and problems, problems of administration and management, problems of assimilation, problems in terms of international relations, and explaining this to countries around the world. I don't know whether the Russians have thought this through or have a plan at the moment. If they do, they haven't shared it with me.

Zareel says, great new design for the opening Alex, Gratz and hi. Thank you, Zaryel for that. Hope you're doing well, Zareel. Alexander, same here. Yeah, Alexander G says, do Duran have to register under the FARA Act, L.O.L. No, we're not Americans. We're not based in the United States. Nothing to do with us.

Ralph Steiner says, what if Basel populations of the UK USA Empire don't want to fight for the Anglo-Zionist bankers as it's only enslaving themselves to UK, USA. It seems stupid. Well, it does seem stupid, but of course some of them do. Some of them, I think, believe they can manipulate the United States and achieve their own objectives by sort of surfing the wave of American power. I think you've seen that in Ukraine. I think you've seen that to a certain extent in Israel as well. I think what happens is that those people eventually get left stranded on the beach.

Just the same. Mega Watt, thank you for that super sticker. Mr. Kim.com. Thank you for that super chat, which says Abba. Thank you for that. Number six, welcome to the Drand community. Number six, thank you for that super chat. Sparky asks,

Brian, Alexander, hasn't Israel killed more Americans than Iran has? Remember, the USS Liberty? Yeah, I think you asked that question in a previous live stream, but the answer, I believe is yes. I mean, I haven't counted the numbers, but I believe it is yes. Sparky says, go answer Allah, fight the power. Cobfan says, maybe Ukraine could turn things around by enlisting Yulia as a modern-day Joan of Arc to defeat that awful Putin.

Well, indeed, that's a brilliant idea. You must send your idea to Zelensky. You provided him with the last missing piece of his victory plan. Of his victory, the ones are weapon. Ralph Steiner says, Americans scream about freedom and human rights and yet American native history and now events of the Middle East indicate the contrary.

How is this reconciled? Well, it's very difficult to reconcile. In fact, at times it's impossible. I'm going to make one observation. There are many, many contradictions and dark moments in the histories of all countries. And that's not to relativise everything. But at the moment, put aside the past,

when the Americans come talking values and democracy and freedom around the world, well, you should be particularly wary because it seems to me that they never come with any of those. Ralph Steiner says the US leak of Jewish attack plan against Iran was for sharing with five eyes only countries. Do other USA vassals feel left out of the USA NWO party?

Who knows? I don't know. I suspect that some allies are more privileged than other allies. I suspect that causes a competition between allies to get even closer to the United States in some cases. But there it is. Michelle Seymarsh says, how can we assess the ICC accusation against Putin concerning the abduction of Ukrainian children in Russia? Well, I have already. I mean, I used to do this kind of work myself when, you know, my previously in my legal career.

And I can tell you for an absolute fact, as far as I'm concerned, this case simply doesn't stand up. It really doesn't. In the vast majority of cases that I know of about Ukrainian children, when the Ukrainian families have wanted them returned, I think that almost without exception the children have been returned, in which case, as far as I could see, the whole abduction argument collapses from the outset. Hesham M.K. says it's all about U.S. elections now. Yeah, I think that's true, by the way. Very true. Ralph Steiner says, do the Okinawans feel themselves occupied?

I believe that some do, but I'm not going to pretend to be deeply informed about this issue. I believe some Okinawans consider themselves distinct from the Japanese. And, of course, they've got the Americans. then. Stana, thank you for that super sticker. Ralph says, when the Yanks occupy you, is that called freedom? What was it tacitist about the Romans? They make a desert and they call it peace.

I once said long ago that the Americans create chaos and call it freedom. Yeah. Tatiana, Carmichol, thank you for two amazing super stickers. Thank you so much for that. Sparky says, Brian, I buy electronic parts from China online. It's funny to read reviews. Ukrainians leave saying how well jamming transmitters, et cetera, work. They go to the trouble to write reviews. Well, there you go.

There you go, Sparky. Elza says, any chance the next peace summit will take place in Kiev and the Ukrainians will probably be invited to it. It's quite possible. Matt Liss-X says, what is the latest going on in Serbia, the Balkans? Is Doddich going to push more to secede from Bosnia? What could the West do if that powder keg goes off? Sooner or later, the powder keg will go off.

I think that the Serb government and Vujuch, what they want is certainly to prevent that happening whilst the war in Ukraine is underway. and I think they're absolutely right. Sticky Marx says the current Western collective has no plan B. Why hubris? They expected their plan to succeed with NATO on China's border. Bye-bye. Bricks. Well, that's right, yes.

But, you know, what do they say? I mean, reinforcing failure, and that's what we're doing. Commander Crossfire says, will Israel annex Lebanon or just puppet it? No, I don't think it would want to annex Lebanese territory. It's not for the moment. I mean, I know there's some people in the Israeli government who've talked about expanding Israel's borders even further and creating an even greater Israel than the one they have.

But I think for the moment, they're talking about a buffer state. But I don't think myself that they're going to be able to create this buffer region that they're talking about because they tried it before in the 1990s, and it didn't work. So why should it work this time? Sparky says, Brian, it shows that China still lets free trade continue despite their jamming transmitters and drone parts being used against Russia. I think Russia weighs out pros and cons and abides this. Well, I think that is true, but there's been reports recently that the Chinese have started to limit drone exports to Ukraine because of the way in which Chinese drones were being used by the Ukrainians.

So it's perhaps not quite as straightforward as you may suggest. Commander Crossfire says EU-NATO too strong in Moldova for it to break away? I think that's probably true for the moment. As I said, if the war in Ukraine ends with a Russian victory, the whole political geography of the southeastern Europe could change. Ralph Steiner says North Carolina is a tragedy, but Gaza is a statistic. Oh, dear. Yes.

Sparky says, Brian, build a better world with bricks. Yes. Robert, Selimi, thank you for that super chat. Sparky talks about Bov and Alexis. We talked about that. Elza says, I just wonder, if pilots couldn't learn English to fly F-16, what language do the scientists speak? Are there Ukrainian books on how to build nukes?

Oh, I'm sure there are. Or at least Russian. Of course, they all speak Russian. I am sure that Ukraine has scientists who could do this. Putin, by the way, again, in that extraordinarily interesting press conference that he gave in Kazan two days ago, he actually said, a point I've made many times,

that creating nuclear weapons today is not so challenging for even a medium-ranking power. The science is old. It's about a century old now. And we're talking about a technology that was first perfected in the 1940s. So, you know, we're, you know, technologically speaking, we've progressed far beyond that level. even the smallest country today has access to computer power, for example, on a scale which the people of the Manhattan Project, well, they didn't have any computers at all. Yeah, Sparky says, Brian, will the Bangladesh coup stick or will they be able to get loose from the West?

Well, for the moment it is sticking, just to say, may not eventually there's been movements backwards and forwards. but for the moment it's holding. Tisham says hashtag justice for Gonzalo Lira, love Brian and the time. Yes. Thank you. I agree with that. And Mr. Kim.com says thank you guys for your useful and truthful information. We all appreciate you at a time when truth is under constant attack.

And we can say the same about you, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Kim.com. Frederick the Great says, does Ocus have a future, especially under Trump? Great show. A good question.

I think it does, unfortunately. I think when these horrible alliances are created, they have a ghastly way of prolonging their existence. And I think Orcus will. I think it was a terrible mistake by Australia to let itself get drawn into this. But there it is. Eliak Kuriakin says about 12 years ago, some guy knew news. Zealand built a cruise missile in his garage for $5,000. The point you were making, Alexander.

Yeah. The Black Cat, thank you for that super sticker. Matthew says, surely the West won't intervene in Ukraine because it can't. I agree. Yes, I agree. I think ultimately there'll be a lot of halving and parhing. And a lot of people demanding all kinds of things. But I think that the Pentagon especially specifically is dead opposed.

to any kind of involvement, direct involvement in Ukraine. Yeah. If they could get involved in Ukraine and defeat Russia and get regime change, they would have done it months and years ago, but they can't. Exactly. Death dealer says, let's hope that Trump wins the election and not the cackling Harris. Thank you for that.

Well, we'll see in two weeks. I'll say, yeah, right around the corner. Alexander Poyachev says, thank you. Thank you for that. Sparky says Assange wasn't connected to the United States either, just saying. No, he wasn't. No, he wasn't. I do think he was prosecuted under Farah, if I may.

No. Just to say. And just to make it clear, we are not anybody's agents. No one's. We're a completely independent agency. We are not connected to anyone at all. just each other and ourselves. True.

Jungle Jin says, speaking of administering occupation, Nazi Germany's administrative contradictions and incompetence would have resulted in its collapse in any case. That is a view that is widely held within academic opinion, that it would have been a completely unsustainable system.

even if Germany had won the war. Sparky says, every time someone says Israel's our friend in the Middle East, I can't help but think before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East, U.S. missionary, John Sheehan. He's absolutely right. Of course he is, you know.

And finally, the last comment comes from Elza. The Real Kim.com should come on alive. Absolutely. We'd love to have him. That would be amazing. Yes. Okay. There's Mr. Kim.com, is now a member of the drag community. Awesome, awesome to have Kim.com with us on this live stream. All right, Alexander, your final thoughts, and I'm going to just do a check and make sure we got all the questions answered.

It's a wonderful program. Can I just say the last, the latest news from Ukraine, as Brian, I'm sure knows, further encirclements of Ukrainian troops, further defeats in all sorts of places. My own sense is that the momentum, we're going to have a slowing because there's going to be the autumn period and the mud, but then November is going to come.

The Russian army is going to be even stronger, and the momentum is going to start accelerating again. And before the end of the year, we're going to see one place after another tumble. That's my own view. Ralph Steiner says the USA Zionist oligarchy is the USA Zionist oligarchy, a sustainable system, question. No, not in the end. And from John Ski, you're in the McDonald's drive-thru, and Trump is at the window.

Well, John, you take the drive-thru food that you ordered and you go home and enjoy it. Absolutely. And you say this came from the possible president of the United States. That's what you do. All right. Alexander, that's the live stream. Fantastic live stream. Fantastic live stream.

And thank you to Brian Berletic at the New Atlas. I will have his links once again as a pinned comment where you can follow Brian. Thank you to everyone that joined us on Rockfin, Odyssey, Rumble, the durand.orgos.com and on YouTube as well. and thank you to our moderators, Tisham, Peter, Zarael, Brett, and I think T. Jordan, I think that's everyone that was moderating. Did I miss anybody?

I don't think so. Thank you to our moderators. A big shout out to all of the moderators on the Duran. Indeed. Indeed, thank you, thank you to everyone who's moderated and to all of you who've asked such interesting questions. Thank you to everyone that asked all the great questions. And we will be back soon. We're going to be posting some good videos in a bit as well.

You got a show with Mersheimer, huh? Absolutely. And Lawrence Wilkerson apparently tomorrow and George Beebe on Thursday. So quite a lot going on. We've got a lot of stuff in the works. All right, everybody. Take care. Take care. Bye.